Plaintiff

All appeals filed by A and the defendant are dismissed.

Plaintiff

The costs of appeal between B and the Defendant are assessed against the Defendant.

1. The grounds alleged in the trial of the Plaintiff A and the Defendant for the acceptance of the judgment of the first instance are not significantly different from the contents alleged by the Plaintiff A and the Defendant in the first instance trial. However, even if the evidence and the purport of the whole of the arguments submitted in the first instance trial and the trial were neglected, the judgment of the first instance is deemed legitimate.

Therefore, the reasoning for the court's reasoning for this part is that the part concerning "the court's appraisal value" No. 6th 10 of the judgment of the court of first instance is "the court appraiser", and the part concerning "the court's appraisal" No. 19 of the same part is "the court appraiser", and the part concerning "the court appraiser" is "the court appraiser", and the part concerning the argument that the defendant emphasizes in the trial of the court of first instance is identical to the part concerning the reasoning for the judgment of the court of first instance except for the addition of the judgment below as follows. Thus, the meaning of the terms used in this part is the same as the judgment of the court of first instance). 2. Additional part 2.

A. The main point of the Defendant’s assertion is that there is a serious error in the appraisal by the court appraiser of the lower court, and it is unreasonable to newly accept the appraisal result as it is.

B. We examine the determination, and the result of the appraiser’s appraisal should be respected unless the method of appraisal is against the rule of experience or unreasonable (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da93790, Nov. 29, 2012). The Defendant had an opportunity to examine the evidence as alleged by the court appraiser through inquiry of facts about the court appraiser, etc. at the court below. The Defendant had a significant error, such as contrary to the rule of experience or unreasonable, such as the method of appraisal by the court appraiser at the court below.

In light of the fact that it is difficult to see, the evidence alone presented by the Defendant is insufficient to accept the Defendant’s argument, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiffs' claims are justified within the scope of recognition of the first instance court, and the remaining claims are justified.